Which reports on a really rigorous sounding study in which people who claimed gluten sensitivity actually did not have any if they didn't know they were eating gluten. Interesting.

Also reports on how much money companies are making selling gluten free products these days.

When you stumbled did you actually happen to read all of it?

Like this part - Biesiekierski recognizes that gluten may very well be the stomach irritant we’ve been looking for. “There is definitely something going on,” she told RCS, “but true NCGS may only affect a very small number of people and may affect more extraintestinal symptoms than first thought. This will only be confirmed with an understanding of its mechanism.”

Currently, Biesiekierski is focused on maintaining an open mind and refining her experimental methods to determine whether or not non-celiac gluten sensitivity truly exists.

“We need to make sure that this research is as well controlled as possible and is reproducible,” Biesiekierski told RCS, subsequently adding the quintessential adage of proper science.

<<Which reports on a really rigorous sounding study in which people who claimed gluten sensitivity actually did not have any if they didn't know they were eating gluten. Interesting.>>
Gluten sensitivity can manifest itself in so many ways. But as far as the above statement is concerned, this is not true of my son. Its very clear if he has ingested gluten, even when i was not aware he had.
Aah..., to be so well informed by skimming over that article of yours. Go do some real research.

However, i do agree that correcting another's spelling does lower the level of debate. I lose respect instantly when people resort to that tactic. Correcting typos is even sillier.

As a school teacher I have corrected others misspellings, poor punctuation, and grammar as a career choice.

We need clarity to communicate and to be precise.

Some people do not like correction since in the throes of a debate, a person misspell something and another person can use the opportunity to dig at the other person. It is a juxtaposition that cannot be won.

I always like to say that misspelling a word is a sign of vaccine damage, but that usually does not go over too well.

As a school teacher I have corrected others misspellings, poor punctuation, and grammar as a career choice.

We need clarity to communicate and to be precise.

Some people do not like correction since in the throes of a debate, a person misspell something and another person can use the opportunity to dig at the other person. It is a juxtaposition that cannot be won.

I always like to say that misspelling a word is a sign of vaccine damage, but that usually does not go over too well.

Does this mean you feel that every spelling error should be pointed out and corrected?

What is the difference between correcting another's spelling errors and pointing out another's "childish level" of debate?

Either way, it's disparaging.

I wasn't debating - just stating my opinion (that several have agreed with) that pointing out simple spelling errors seems to bring the level of conversation down to that of an argument between school girls. Was the correction really necessary?

Do you really honestly believe that she didn't know the poster meant to type "big"?

As a school teacher I have corrected others misspellings, poor punctuation, and grammar as a career choice.

We need clarity to communicate and to be precise.

Some people do not like correction since in the throes of a debate, a person misspell something and another person can use the opportunity to dig at the other person. It is a juxtaposition that cannot be won.

I always like to say that misspelling a word is a sign of vaccine damage, but that usually does not go over too well.

I think correcting another's error, if done tactfully is fine. I dont mind being corrected. I make plenty of typos, and sometimes misspell (that may have been mispelled, or misspelt), but someone picking misspellings as a means to demean one's opponent in an argument is another matter. It happened to me once, and found it really annoying, and that is why i have strong feelings about it.

However, this never happened here. And yes, this discussion has been completely derailed.

Well, there you have it. Science is settled!! 37 people are all you need to prove that people aren't really gluten sensitive!! Everyone dump your stocks, the fad is over!

None of the 37 could detect whether they were eating gluten or not. That's a big enough study to confirm the likelihood that 95% or so are experiencing a nocebo effect. Could still be a small percentage in the sampled population who are not fooling themselves.

None of the 37 could detect whether they were eating gluten or not. That's a big enough study to confirm the likelihood that 95% or so are experiencing a nocebo effect. Could still be a small percentage in the sampled population who are not fooling themselves.

I guess you have never studied statistics? This is pretty simple.

Or do you think math is some kind of plot against believers?

Apparently, that study was done by someone who knows nothing about intestinal issues related to gluten.

Did you read the study? The study participants were put on a "FODMAP" diet, which is NOT gluten-free (it can contain oats and spelt), nor is it dairy-free (though it is lactose-free). They were then given either a diet high in gluten, or a diet high in whey protein, BOTH OF WHICH are likely to cause intestinal problems for people with either celiac or gluten intolerance. Yes, lactose can be a problem for many people, but so can casein--and the FODMAPS diet is not casein-free, and can include cheese and yogurt.

It's not at all surprising that there was not a significant difference between the two groups, or even that a third group, who was given the FODMAP diet for both weeks, also complained of increased symptoms. If they had been on a gluten-free diet before the trials, and then were on a gluten-containing FODMAP diet, of course they'd have increased symptoms.

And you think it's scientific to conclude that this proves that gluten sensitivity doesn't exist?

The description of that study reminds me of the one that was done many years ago to prove that food colorings do not provoke ADHD. Some doctor had theorized that something in food was causing the behavioral problems. He put kids on a no food colorings diet and had great success. Then someone did a study to debunk it and the approach went underground for many years, which was very profitable to the pharmaceutical approach to treating ADHD.

The study involved completely messing with the doctor's approach and allowing children to have exposures to food coloring as often as every 72 hours. There was no improvement in behavior.

It was Red Dye mostly and Yellow Dye that were the culprits. From that book, I learned that even if you get a white cake, there is coloring still in it because a drop or two of say, blue coloring, will make the white whiter!

And still...crickets...when it comes to addressing a CDC scientist admitting to manipulating/ hiding important data.

They're all hoping this will go away...you can bet, they're scrambling to announce something huge that will send people scurrying for vaccines, something big enough to make people forget all about one little researcher. It's too quiet out there. Even Dorit has been unnaturally silent the last few days. I'm betting we'll hear about an Ebola outbreak in the US.

Flu season is about to start and that is usually very good for some fearmongering. I monitor the flu propaganda down in NZ and Oz, and there are noises about it being a very bad year.

Yes, I already got an email in my inbox from a pharmacy chain where I picked up a prescription years ago, reminding me to "get my flu shot BEFORE the bad flu season begins"

It warned me that young children, elderly and pregnant women are at the "biggest risk" of contracting the flu, and that I need at least 2 weeks to respond to the shot before I get exposed to the flu...so act now.

I wanted to email back and let them know I am acting now..we all upped our vitamin D with the end of Summer coming in, are taking our 10 day round of echinacea I tinctured from my yard, and the kids have been reminded to wash their hands. I also have hearty cooler weather meals from scratch we will be nourishing with, and the kids have an added 1/2 hour of sleep to their routines. There's our "shot" of medicine.

Apparently, that study was done by someone who knows nothing about intestinal issues related to gluten.

Did you read the study? The study participants were put on a "FODMAP" diet, which is NOT gluten-free (it can contain oats and spelt), nor is it dairy-free (though it is lactose-free). They were then given either a diet high in gluten, or a diet high in whey protein, BOTH OF WHICH are likely to cause intestinal problems for people with either celiac or gluten intolerance. Yes, lactose can be a problem for many people, but so can casein--and the FODMAPS diet is not casein-free, and can include cheese and yogurt.

It's not at all surprising that there was not a significant difference between the two groups, or even that a third group, who was given the FODMAP diet for both weeks, also complained of increased symptoms. If they had been on a gluten-free diet before the trials, and then were on a gluten-containing FODMAP diet, of course they'd have increased symptoms.

And you think it's scientific to conclude that this proves that gluten sensitivity doesn't exist?

You are conflating two different studies. One study was completely FODMAP and dairy free. It had 2 phases: baseline and treatment. Both the baseline and all treatment diets were completely FODMAP and dairy free. One of the treatment diets was a control: just a repetition of the baseline. But the subjects even reacted to the control diet, that's the kicker, it was a nocebo.

There was a separate study mentioned that showed that FODMAP causes upset stomachs, which is old news by the way.